Run any Skill in Manus with one click

adr-review

Stars415

Forks14

UpdatedMay 17, 2026 at 12:41

Review one or more ADRs with fresh eyes (as a team member without prior context), identify narrative and structural issues, then rewrite them. Use when the user asks to review, improve, rewrite, or take a fresh-eyes pass on an ADR or a set of ADRs (Architecture Decision Records).

Installation

Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.

Run Skill in Manus

Source

prisma

prisma/prisma-next

View GitHub Repository View Creator Repositories

Download

Run Skill in Manus

Related occupationsSOC

Based on SOC occupation classification

Software DevelopersComputer and Mathematical Occupations·SOC 15-1252

SKILL.md

readonly

name	adr-review
description	Review one or more ADRs with fresh eyes (as a team member without prior context), identify narrative and structural issues, then rewrite them. Use when the user asks to review, improve, rewrite, or take a fresh-eyes pass on an ADR or a set of ADRs (Architecture Decision Records).

Reviewing and Rewriting ADRs

Read each ADR with fresh eyes. Pretend you're a member of the team who doesn't have all the context the author has. The goal is to find places where the document assumes context the reader doesn't have, buries the decision, or carries baggage that won't make sense to a future reader.

This skill applies whether you're working on a single ADR or a batch. Treat each ADR independently — do the analysis and rewrite per document — even when several are in scope at once.

Workflow

Analyze first, in chat. Before touching any file, list the issues you found and explain them. Do not rewrite silently. When multiple ADRs are in scope, group your analysis per ADR so the user can react to each one before rewrites land.
Then rewrite each document to address the issues you identified.

What a good ADR looks like

Starts with a clear grounding example. Give the reader something concrete to pin understanding to before the abstract reasoning starts.
Has a strong narrative that builds the topic up bit by bit, explaining clearly throughout. Don't compress; let ideas breathe.
Leads with the decision. State what's being decided up front. The reader should know the conclusion before working through the reasoning.
Ends with alternatives considered. Put rejected options last so the reader isn't loaded down with information about paths the document is making irrelevant.

What an ADR must NOT contain

ADRs are long-lived documentation. They should not contain:

References to Linear tickets, GitHub issues, or other ticket trackers.
Milestones from the project that produced the ADR.
States the system passed through during or preceding a refactor that will never be seen again — interim names, deprecated wrappers being removed, "current" qualifiers, "we used to" framing.

If a piece of context only makes sense to someone who lived through the change, cut it or rewrite it as a fact about the system as it is.

Output shape

When invoked:

Read the ADR (or ADRs) in scope.
Write your analysis in the chat — what's missing, what's buried, what's transient, what's unclear to a fresh reader. Be specific; quote or cite the parts you're flagging. For multiple ADRs, label each block clearly.
Then rewrite each file end-to-end so it follows the structure above.

More from this repository

same repository

prisma-next-extension-upgrade

prisma/prisma-next

Upgrade Prisma Next in your extension. Bumps every `@prisma-next/*` dependency to the requested target (or npm `latest`), runs the per-transition upgrade instructions for the extension SPI (middleware lifecycle, codec / migration-tools / framework-components churn, seed-migration on-disk shape), verifies the pins are correctly exact via `prisma-next-check-pins`, runs the extension's own typecheck and tests, and commits each minor step on its own. Use when the user asks to "upgrade Prisma Next" in an extension package, or to update an extension's `@prisma-next/*` deps to a new minor.

2026-07-24415

prisma-next-upgrade

prisma/prisma-next

Upgrade Prisma Next in your app. Bumps every `@prisma-next/*` dependency from the version pinned in the lockfile to the requested target (or npm `latest`), applies any required code-translation steps from the per-transition upgrade instructions, validates with the project's own typecheck + tests, and commits each minor step on its own. Use when the user asks to "upgrade Prisma Next", "bump Prisma Next", "move to Prisma Next X.Y", or asks an agent to deal with an `@prisma-next/*` minor bump in their app.

2026-07-24415

prisma-next-supabase

prisma/prisma-next

Use Prisma Next with a Supabase project via `@prisma-next/extension-supabase` — wire `extensions: [supabasePack]`, declare cross-space FKs to `supabase:auth.AuthUser`, author RLS policies (`policy_select` / `policy_update` / `@@rls`, `auth.uid()` predicates), build `db.ts` with the `supabase()` factory, bind roles per request (`asUser(jwt)` / `asAnon()` / `asServiceRole()`), query `auth.*` / `storage.*` via the `db.asServiceRole().supabase` admin root, and validate JWTs (`jwksUrl` for current projects / `jwtSecret` for legacy HS256). Use for supabase, RLS, row level security, policy, role binding, anon, authenticated, service_role, auth.users, auth.uid(), JWT, JWKS, SUPABASE_JWKS_URL, SUPABASE_JWT_SECRET, SUPABASE.JWT_INVALID, SUPABASE.CONFIG_INVALID, RoleBoundDb, session pooler, supabase:auth.AuthUser, @prisma-next/extension-supabase.

2026-07-24415

prisma-next-queries

prisma/prisma-next

Write Prisma Next queries for Postgres, SQLite, or Mongo — pick a lane (Postgres/SQLite `db.orm.<Model>` + `db.sql.<table>`; Mongo `db.orm.<root>` + `db.query.from(...)` pipeline builder), filter / project / sort / paginate, eager-load with `.include(...)`, Postgres/SQLite `db.transaction(...)`, Postgres/SQLite ORM `.aggregate(...)`, Mongo aggregations via query builder, namespace-aware accessors (`db.orm.<ns>.<Model>`, `db.sql.<ns>.<table>`). Triggers: query, where, match, select, project, orderBy, take, skip, include, lookup, first, all, count, aggregate, group, create, update, delete, upsert, returning, transaction, db.close, script teardown, variant, polymorphism, drizzle-style, kysely-style. Notes: `.all()` is a Thenable (just `await` it), iterators are single-use (`RUNTIME.ITERATOR_CONSUMED`), Postgres `count` is `number` while sum/avg/min/max are `number | null`, ranges use chained `.where()` or `and(...)` (no `.between(...)`).

2026-07-24415

prisma-next-contract

prisma/prisma-next

Edit the Prisma Next data contract — add models, fields, relations, indexes, enums, value objects (composite types), type aliases, namespaces (Postgres schemas), cross-contract foreign keys (cross-space FK), polymorphic types (`@@discriminator` / `@@base`), use extension namespaces (`pgvector.Vector(...)`, `cipherstash.EncryptedString(...)`), wire `prisma-next.config.ts` with `defineConfig` from the `@prisma-next/<target>/config` façade, and run `prisma-next contract emit`. Use for schema, models, fields, attributes, soft delete, paranoid, scopes, validations, callbacks, prisma schema, PSL, contract.prisma, contract.ts, contract.json, contract.d.ts, `@prisma-next/postgres/config`, `@prisma-next/postgres/contract-builder`, `@prisma-next/postgres/control`, `@prisma-next/mongo/config`, `@prisma-next/mongo/contract-builder`, `extensions:`, pgvector, cipherstash, postgis, paradedb, supabase, `@prisma-next/extension-supabase`, `@@control`, control policy, managed, tolerated, external, observed.

2026-07-23415

prisma-next-debug

prisma/prisma-next

Read a Prisma Next structured error envelope and route to the right recovery — code, domain, severity, why, fix, meta. Use for error, exception, my emit failed, my query won't typecheck, my query crashed, my migration won't apply, MIGRATION.HASH_MISMATCH, BUDGET.ROWS_EXCEEDED, BUDGET.TIME_EXCEEDED, RUNTIME.ABORTED, PLAN.HASH_MISMATCH, CONTRACT.MARKER_MISSING, PN-RUN-3001, PN-RUN-3002, PN-RUN-3030, PN-MIG-2001, PN-CLI-4011, PN-SCHEMA-0001, drift, capability missing, planner conflict, prisma studio, EXPLAIN, query log, db.end, db.close, script won't exit, hangs, close connection, pool.end, client is closed.

2026-07-23415

name	adr-review
description	Review one or more ADRs with fresh eyes (as a team member without prior context), identify narrative and structural issues, then rewrite them. Use when the user asks to review, improve, rewrite, or take a fresh-eyes pass on an ADR or a set of ADRs (Architecture Decision Records).

Reviewing and Rewriting ADRs

This skill applies whether you're working on a single ADR or a batch. Treat each ADR independently — do the analysis and rewrite per document — even when several are in scope at once.

Workflow

Analyze first, in chat. Before touching any file, list the issues you found and explain them. Do not rewrite silently. When multiple ADRs are in scope, group your analysis per ADR so the user can react to each one before rewrites land.
Then rewrite each document to address the issues you identified.

What a good ADR looks like

Starts with a clear grounding example. Give the reader something concrete to pin understanding to before the abstract reasoning starts.
Has a strong narrative that builds the topic up bit by bit, explaining clearly throughout. Don't compress; let ideas breathe.
Leads with the decision. State what's being decided up front. The reader should know the conclusion before working through the reasoning.
Ends with alternatives considered. Put rejected options last so the reader isn't loaded down with information about paths the document is making irrelevant.

What an ADR must NOT contain

ADRs are long-lived documentation. They should not contain:

References to Linear tickets, GitHub issues, or other ticket trackers.
Milestones from the project that produced the ADR.
States the system passed through during or preceding a refactor that will never be seen again — interim names, deprecated wrappers being removed, "current" qualifiers, "we used to" framing.

If a piece of context only makes sense to someone who lived through the change, cut it or rewrite it as a fact about the system as it is.

Output shape

When invoked:

Read the ADR (or ADRs) in scope.
Write your analysis in the chat — what's missing, what's buried, what's transient, what's unclear to a fresh reader. Be specific; quote or cite the parts you're flagging. For multiple ADRs, label each block clearly.
Then rewrite each file end-to-end so it follows the structure above.